Nandlal Kanoria v. CIT

122 ITR 405High Court1980#14824 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2022.

Judgments citing Nandlal Kanoria v. CIT

DY CIT CC-1(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 41/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. J.D Mistry, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Singh
Section 115OSection 115QSection 2

…etermining the relationship between the companies, when the section does not refer to indirect shareholding. Similarly, the Appellant submits that an indirect transfer cannot be fall within the ambit of section 2(22)(a) of the Act. Also refer Nandlal Kanoria (122 ITR 405) Cal HC (Pg. 507-511 of Legal Paper Book, Vol. II). 96. The Appellant further submits that the presumption that such imaginary dividend is out of ―accumulated profits‖ is also a result of Ld. AO consciously ignoring the actual facts, the scheme and the accounting entries as per which the debit in respect of net assets has gone to amalgamation re…

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1935/MUM/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. J.D Mistry, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Singh
Section 115OSection 115QSection 2

…etermining the relationship between the companies, when the section does not refer to indirect shareholding. Similarly, the Appellant submits that an indirect transfer cannot be fall within the ambit of section 2(22)(a) of the Act. Also refer Nandlal Kanoria (122 ITR 405) Cal HC (Pg. 507-511 of Legal Paper Book, Vol. II). 96. The Appellant further submits that the presumption that such imaginary dividend is out of ―accumulated profits‖ is also a result of Ld. AO consciously ignoring the actual facts, the scheme and the accounting entries as per which the debit in respect of net assets has gone to amalgamation re…

DCIT - 21(3), MUMBAI vs. RUPIN HEMANT BANKER, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 2845/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Badresh DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 2(22)(e)Section 22(2)(e)

…s contention, learned Authorised Representative relied upon the following decisions:– i) DCIT v/s Maipo India Ltd., [2008] 116 TTJ 791 (Del.HC); ii) CIT v/s Madhur Housing And Development Co., [2018] 401 ITR 152 (SC); and iii) Nandlal Kanoria v/s CIT, [1980] 122 ITR 405 (Cal.). 7 Shri Rupin Hemant Banker 11. The learned Departmental Representative submitted, the facts on record clearly reveal that the assessee not only has substantial shareholding in the company which advanced the loan to his wife, but he was fully in control not only with the affairs of the company which advanced the loan, but also the bank a…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI BASANT PODDAR

The appeal is disposed off

ITA/73/2010HC Karnataka10 Dec 2018

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath

Section 260A

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.73 OF 2010 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 1(1), C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND: SHRI. BASANT PODDAR NO.487, 10TH CROSS, RMV EXTENSION, SADASHIVNAG…

ITO 2(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. SATURN ADVISORY SERVICES P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 802/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Years: 2006-07 Income Tax Officer-2(3)(2), M/S Saturn Advisory Room No. 518A, Services Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 44, Strategic House, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mint Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती/Assessee) Pan No.:-Aajcs2674N

Section 143(1)

…are concerned with the block assessment which covers the period 1st April, 1990 to 24th Aug., 2000. 12. Before concluding, we quote hereinbelow the relevant paragraphs from the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Nandlal Kanoria vs. CIT, (1980) 122 ITR 405 (Cal) at p. 415 : "The only question which remains to be considered is that whether the said company made the payments of the said sum of Rs. 75,000 and Rs. 4,80,000 to Indira & Co. for the benefit of the assessee. So far as Rs. 75,000 is concerned it is found by the Tribunal, though not very clearly, that this amount was received by Indira & Co…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. MUKUNDRAY K.SHAH

The appeal stands allowed with no order as to costs

C.A. No.-001873-001873 - 2007Supreme Court10 Apr 2007
For Respondent: Mukundray K. Shah
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 2(22)(e)

…ich covers the period 1.4.1990 to 24.8.2000. Before concluding, we quote hereinbelow the relevant paragraphs from the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Nandlal Kanoria v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central, Calcutta reported in (1980) 122 ITR 405 at p. 415: "The only question which remains to be considered is that whether the said company made the payments of the said sum of Rs. 75,000 and Rs. 4,80,000 to Indira & Co. for the benefit of the assessee. So far as Rs. 75,000 is concerned it is found by the Tribunal, though not very clearly, that this amount was received by Indira & Co.…

Nandlal Kanoria v. CIT (122 ITR 405) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax